THE MENNONITE BROTHERHOOD IN RUSSIA (1789 - 1910), P. M. Friesen, 1911

rned 378 THE MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH their backs on him at a conference in the fall of 1858 155 and loudly declared that they would have nothing to do with him henceforth but would go their way according to the Holy Scriptures and their conscience, f) Since that separation confusion among them pro- gressed irresistibly. Just one example, demanded by the complaint of the reporter from St. Petersburg; one of the ‘two highly regarded school teachers’ in the Mariopol District, ‘reported to have had a particularly blessed ministry in his village,' could no longer participate in the regular church services because his Christian conscience revolted against sitting ‘in the seat of the scoffers’ according to Psalm 1:1. At the same time, his conscience and his understanding of free grace found it quite agreeable to carry on adultery with his neighbor’s wife, also regarded as a believing sister, while the neighbor was in church. 156 g) This fire, farmed into a bright flame first of all in the Mariopol District by the so-called brethren, spread rapidly among the members of the Separatist and Mennonite congregations. It consisted of this delusion: ‘The free grace of God in Christ releases the believer from all previously existing ecclesiastical and human order, as well as from all strife against flesh and blood; the believer is free from the law and does not need to strive for sanctification of heart and life, for in Christ he is perfect, holy, and righteous before God, so that sin cannot harm his salvation in any way in this life or the next, since it is no longer the believer but only his flesh that commits sin; it is therefore totally impossible for a believer to be lost; children of God thus have nothing to pray for because they already possess everything; all that remains for them is to thank, to cheer, and be jubilant.’ 157 h) Several church members demanded that I administer holy communion whenever they felt the need for it, separately for them and those whom they would designate as ‘believers.’ This I rejected as an inadmissible innovation which to my knowledge had never been practiced in the Mennonite Church and which would only foster spiritual pride and disturb the unity within the church. So they began to take communion in private homes together with some members of other congregations, maintaining that according to the teaching of the Scripture, and their conscience, they could not take communion together with the unbelievers in the church. 15 ® i) Thereupon they were repeatedly exhorted by the respective church-elders, the ministers, and the assembled brotherhood to refrain from their presumptuousness arising from pride. Not only were all remonstrances and exhortations utterly fruitless, but these blinded individuals went even further in that on January 6, 1860, they formally withdrew from the Mennonite brotherhood and declared frankly ‘that they wanted no fellowship with this fallen church, w